Capital

Projects must be genuinely investable, development risks must be resolved before large capital is deployed, and timelines must be credible.

Our approach is designed to do exactly that — by embedding legitimacy, consent, and governance into project foundations, not layering them on after capital is committed.

We operate in alignment with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, not as a compliance exercise, but as development infrastructure that protects value.

This means:

• Early human rights and development due diligence

  We identify and address environmental, social, governance, and consent-related risks upstream, while project design is still flexible. Risks are assessed, decisions documented, and trade-offs made through an auditable process aligned with investor, regulatory, and lender expectations — before they escalate into delay, litigation, or asset impairment

• Durable consent and participation

  We design projects with meaningful participation by communities and Indigenous Peoples from the outset, securing consent that is durable over time, not transactional.

  This prevents the forms of opposition and instability that routinely derail projects and destroy value after capital is deployed.

• Structured access to remedy

  We implement clear, credible grievance and remedy pathways so issues are surfaced and resolved early, fairly, and transparently — reducing escalation risk and protecting delivery timelines.

• Responsibility embedded in project design

  Respect for human rights, cultural heritage, and land use is embedded into project scope, sequencing, and governance — reducing exposure to regulatory failure, licence instability, and reputational harm.

• Transparency and accountability

  We maintain clear reporting, defined decision rights, and independent oversight, giving capital partners confidence that commitments are operationalised, risks are actively managed, and decisions are defensible.